Re: Coloured diacritics (Was: Transcoding Tamil in the presence of markup)

From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Tue Dec 09 2003 - 07:16:57 EST

  • Next message: jcowan@reutershealth.com: "Re: Coloured diacritics (Was: Transcoding Tamil in the presence of markup)"

    On 09/12/2003 03:41, Philippe Verdy wrote:

    >Peter Kirk writes:
    >
    >
    >>Philippe, you have now stated this (several times). But just a day
    >>earlier you yourself stated that the rule forbidding combining marks at
    >>the start of a string would never be relaxed because it is fundamental
    >>to the XML containment model. You don't usually contradict yourself
    >>quite so obviously.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I don't know how you interpreted what I may have said a few days before.
    >I have certainly not said that XML forbids combining marks at the start
    >of XML, just that W3C does not _recommand_ it as well as any other
    >defective combining sequences, as they are known to cause problems
    >(for example when it's difficult to track the effective text file type)
    >
    >
    So, let's get this clear. Within an XML or HTML document, if I want an e
    with a red acute accent on it, it is quite permissible to write:

    e<span class="red-text">{U+0301}</span>

    where {U+0301} is replaced by the actual Unicode character, and
    "red-text" is defined in the stylesheet. So it is not a problem that
    there is a defective combining sequence, nor that the accent is not
    combined with the e as it would be in NFC. Is that correct?

    If this is correct, then the Tamil problem which Peter J is concerned
    about has gone away completely, or at least it is reduced to a tricky
    rendering issue.

    -- 
    Peter Kirk
    peter@qaya.org (personal)
    peterkirk@qaya.org (work)
    http://www.qaya.org/
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 08:01:32 EST